FRC Speaker Will Offer 4 Objections to Religious Liberty

University of St. Thomas Constitutional Law Professor Michael Stokes Paulsen will speak Friday at the Family Research Council's Washington, D.C., headquarters about the four primary objections to religious liberty in America. (Video screenshot image)

Here's a cold, hard fact: American religious liberty is based on premises no longer universally shared in an increasingly secular society.

Religious liberty has always been controversial, even in America, with its history of religious dissent and with the Constitution's affirmative protection of the right to the "free exercise" of one's faith. As a constitutional arrangement, it only makes sense on the premises that God exists, that God makes claims on the loyalty and conduct of human beings and that such claims, rightly perceived and understood, are prior to and of superior obligation to the claims of any human authority.

That is the basis of the First Amendment's religion clauses, but with so many Americans objecting to those basic principles, religious liberty is on the defensive today, perhaps more than ever in our nation's history. University of St. Thomas professor Michael Stokes Paulsen, author of more than 90 scholarly articles on constitutional law, will give a lecture on that very subject beginning at noon EST Friday at Family Research Council headquarters.

His lecture, which will be followed by a question and answer session, will focus on the main controversies surrounding religious liberty today. He will share what he thinks are the four chief objections to religious liberty and provide possible responses to each objection. Those objections are:

"The law should be the same for everyone"—that is, that there should not be such a thing as religious accommodations

"Religion isn't a real thing"—and therefore ought not receive affirmative protection in any form

"People will abuse it"—that is, that protecting religious liberty will lead to false claims and perverse incentives

"Religious liberty is harmful to others"—and thus should be rejected in principle

Professor Paulsen will suggest that each of these objections, in one way or another, is actually an objection to the idea of religious liberty and to the existence of the Constitution's protections of it. By unmasking and examining the objections, we go a long way toward understanding and vindicating the true objective of the Constitution's surprisingly radical embrace of religious liberty.

Your Turn

Please be considerate and respectful of your fellow posters. If Jesus and your mother would not approve of your writing, you should revise your comment before submitting.

Use standard writing style and punctuation. Complete sentences and proper grammar will help others understand you.

Do not use profanity, obscenities, abusive language or otherwise objectionable content (as determined by Charisma Media moderators, in their sole discretion). Comments should not harass, abuse or threaten another's personal safety or property, make false statements, defame or impersonate someone else.

Do not question others' faith just because you disagree with them. It adds nothing to the discussion and only causes strife.

Do not question why someone comes to this website just because they disagree with you or the content of the article.

Do not post personal information including phone numbers, email or mailing addresses, or credit card information belonging to you or others.

Do not include copyrighted content or other intellectual property that you do not own or have the explicit rights or lisenses to distribute.

Do not post, directly or through links, viruses, misleading, malicious or off-topic content.

Please consider the following statements pertaining to comments posted by you and other visitors to our website:

Appearance of comments, advertisements or hyperlinks made by other commenters on this site do not necessarily indicate or constitute acceptance of or endorsement of the products, companies, corporations, ministries, organizations or agencies in whole or in part by staff members and/or the members of the editorial board of Charisma Media.

Comments are not pre-screened before they post. Charisma Media reserves the right to modify or remove any comment that does not comply with the above guidelines and to deny access of your Disqus account to make additional comments to the website without any notice. If you have been denied access to comment due to a violation of these terms please do not create multiple accounts in an attempt to circumvent the system. The correct course of action is to request a review of your account status by contacting webmaster@charismamedia.com.

Charisma Media is not responsible or liable in any way for comments posted by its users.

If you believe a comment is in violation of the above guidelines, U.S. law or International treaties, or is legitimate "trolling" please flag the post or contact webmaster@charismamedia.com. Include a link to the comment, along with a statement explaining what you believe the violation is and any evidence backing your claim. Charisma Media moderators will consider your request and decide on the most appropriate action.